HP anounces no ROM upgrades for current iPaqs ~ to much work.

David Hettel · 04-08-08, 01:14 PM

Hp has announced that it would involve too much effort to supply a ROM upgrade to the 6.1 version of Windows Mobile according to Brighthand. If this is indeed true, then so much for HP's support for the 210, and welcome to the paid to be a Alpha tester world...

FrinkTL · 04-08-08, 02:03 PM

My concern is less about them not providing an incremental upgrade to 6.1 and more about what this might signal with respect to them fixing some blatant bugs like Compact Flash battery consumption and certain software "incompatibilities" (such as FlexMail). If they don't mean to do even so little as providing ROM "patches", we should file a class action lawsuit against them for what would turn out to be a blatant LIE when they stated they would provide a "3 year support cycle."

04-08-08, 03:29 PM

the support cycle doesnt cover os updates...

this is typical of hp, im not surprised

d

woohoonews · 04-08-08, 03:49 PM

This is why we need to support the hackers over at xda-developers.

04-09-08, 06:12 AM

however, another poster in brighthand asks, and rightfully so, what this might mean for the various other support items that we are waiting for. Cradle. USB host cable (after all it wasn't exactly mentioned as a selling point to the consumer), 24pin to USB cable for quick charging from wall outlet or car outlet, VGA out cable.....

to tell you the truth, it is worrisome. maybe preparation of the various harware devices is also "too much work"?

FrinkTL · 04-09-08, 08:37 AM

I thought I'd see if I could elicit a confirmation response from HP by posting a link to the Brighthand forum thread and the quote from HP, indicating that this seemed to poke a gaping hole in the claimed "3 year support". Want to know what their response was? Read the email they sent me for yourself:

"Dear Timothy Frink,

We appreciate that you are a registered user of the HP Support Forums, and see you have recently utilized the Support Forums service. However, your message 'No WM 6.1 Release for iPAQ 21x??' had to be removed due to one or more of the following reasons.

1. You had requested the removal of your message.
2. The message was a duplicate posting.
3. The message contained advertising of goods or services.
4. The question was off-topic and did not align with the charter of the HP Support Forums.
5. Language, personal rants, or material deemed abusive, defamatory or obscene.
6. The posting contained private information on other users and/or HP employees.
7. Other reasons deemed necessary by the HP Support Forums staff.

We encourage you to share your technical knowledge and tap into the vast experience of other community members. All members will learn more when reading messages of technical value, whether they are new questions or replies.

Thank you for your understanding.

Best regards,
HP Support Forums Team"

Nice, eh? I thought it only appropriate to reply to their email. Any bets on whether they'll even bother to reply (or if they'll ban me from their forum)? Here's the text of my email reply:

"You presume too much to anticipate my understanding of an irrational policy. Why are you so afraid of other people learning the truth that you LIED when you said you were committed to a "3 year support period?!?" How can you include the word "support" if you don't plan on actually providing support? What kind of message does it send to your customers who spend hundreds of dollars individually and millions of dollars collectively on your products, when rather than provide an honest answer, you slam the door shut on the question?

You and I both know that the only exception you took to my post was that it revealed the truth you want to remain a secret: that you do not, in fact, plan on providing true support for the new iPAQ product line. My post was not a duplicate, not an advertisement, nor off-topic, nor did it contain private information of any kind. You removed it because if you were to answer it honestly, it would result in a loss of sales. Sales that are based upon a material mis-representation in your marketing materials that state you are committed to 3 years of support. "Committed?" Perhaps you should look that word up in the dictionary so you can see that it doesn't mean "if I feel like it" nor "if it isn't too much work."

It is a very sad day when a company cares so little for the customer and corporate ethics - to say nothing about the law - that they can publish a blatant lie and then try to hide behind a veil of silence and censorship when the lie is discovered.

It's a tremendous disappointment. The new iPAQ series represents some simply AWESOME hardware. All it really needs is a software company that is truly willing to stand behind it."

04-09-08, 08:51 AM

FrinkTL, while I may agree with almost every word you wrote, I also agree that you will not get anywhere with that letter. Maybe if your name was FrinkTL of FrinkTL associates law firm - or FrinkTL CEO IBM, but not anyway else. I tried to get into the support forum of HP recently (within the past 10 minutes) and it seems that they are suffering from a serious slowdown such that I couldn't get to the forums. I am going to guess that they are getting bombarded with similar mails in every shape, color and flavour. Good.

Maybe that will actually move them? maybe?

harpgliss · 04-09-08, 05:42 PM

Hi,

The complaining here and at Brighthand is rather baffling to me.

I do not read "support" as providing the latest OS upgrade, it reads, to me, as making sure the hardware and current software works proper.

Now, yes, they have issues both with the hardware and software and should be made to fix these issues.

It seems that all the current cooking of roms has made everyone think that all the manufacturers should provide these.

I do not see that HP ever promised this kind of "upgrade" as part of their "support".

Making sure what you bought works proper is, my understanding of support.

Upgrading is adding functionality to your existing product.

I do see them falling short on this.

Theemed · 04-09-08, 05:59 PM

Same here, I'm betting you won't get a reply. Don't even think they will ban you, still they will ignore your reply with a chance of 99%.
The product is young and most of the users can understand the "small" defects it have by compensating with the coolness of owning it, still knowing from the start they don't intend to properly support it won't make them happy about it, neither will favoir their sales. Me, I didn't check any reviews/forums before buying it, I was just blinded by the desidre to own the latest and fastest iPAQ. Still, the other 9 out of 10 (probably) guys who do check forums, and still have to buy it, won't really see much of an advertisement either here nor on brighthand.
HP has to rethink its policies or start accepting the idea of iPAQ 210 series sales to fall down quick,

Theemed · 04-09-08, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by harpgliss

I do not read "support" as providing the latest OS upgrade, it reads, to me, as making sure the hardware and current software works proper.

Now, yes, they have issues both with the hardware and software and should be made to fix these issues.

That's ecxactly the real concern of us users, as I understand it. I personally don't really care about 6.1 upgrade, not as much as I care for them to solve elementary issues like CF power and everything else which has come out during the tests by a wide sample of people. Them showing so little interest in releasing a 6.1 upgrade probably is (and regarding me, without the probably) a hint to the complaining users that they will dis-aknowledge all the proper issues as well.
As far as I know, there has been no official acknowledgement of the CF power issue from HP, to make an example... and for one, that is both a serious problem, and one which is widely verified. That is something which may generate worries in the buyers :)

harpgliss · 04-09-08, 06:26 PM

Hi,

I say, definitely call them out on the support or lack thereof but the rom upgrade really strikes me as a non issue.

FrinkTL · 04-09-08, 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by harpgliss

Hi,

The complaining here and at Brighthand is rather baffling to me.

I do not read "support" as providing the latest OS upgrade, it reads, to me, as making sure the hardware and current software works proper.

Now, yes, they have issues both with the hardware and software and should be made to fix these issues.

It seems that all the current cooking of roms has made everyone think that all the manufacturers should provide these.

I do not see that HP ever promised this kind of "upgrade" as part of their "support".

Making sure what you bought works proper is, my understanding of support.

Upgrading is adding functionality to your existing product.

I do see them falling short on this.

I personally don't care about getting an incremental upgrade to WM 6.1, either. Even if it's free. What worries me more is that when I posted to HP's Forum and pointed to the Brighthand thread and asked the question if that meant that there would be no ROM fixes/patches, HP's response was to promptly (within 36 hours) remove the post!!! THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE IDEAL OPPORTUNITY TO ALLAY EVERYONE'S FEARS THAT THEY WEREN'T GOING TO PROVIDE FIXES, AND RE-STATE THEIR COMMITTMENT TO THEIR USERS. Now, either they are MONUMENTALLY STUPID (can't rule that out, unfortunately), OR they REALLY DON'T plan on providing fixes to the ROM. It's really that simple. Am I missing some obvious third option?

You know what else I don't understand? If it's so much effort and cost to build and certify a ROM, why not CHARGE for them? That would make the stockholders happy. It would make us users and corporate clients happy/happier. There are enough "stay on the most recent version" addicts out there (no offense intended to you if you're one of them - I tend to be the same way about hardware) that it would probably meet with moderate sales, especially for more "major" upgrades. Even I (a true "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" guy) might fork over close to $100 to keep a $500 device current.

Julie · 04-09-08, 07:24 PM

I am very active on HP's IPAQ forum, and have participated on that forum for several years, and I own 4 IPAQs. It does not surprise me in the least that HP has no plans to release 6.1 for its current line of IPAQs - they did the same thing with newly released IPAQs when WM6.0 was released. It is disappointing, but not surprising.

In regards to existing issues with the devices and speaking from past experience:

HP never formally acknowledges problems before it releases firmware or ROM updates that address problems.
HP never formally responds to questions, rants, whatever, that users post in their forums. The forums are moderated by HP, but the moderators never provide formal responses in any of the threads there.
The ONLY way to get HP to respond to user concerns and device issues is by contacting the support desk directly. You must log a formal support ticket with HP and the more users who contact the support desk regarding issues (and I'm not talking about complaining about a policy to not release WM6.1 - I'm talking about real support issues like the CF/battery drain issue I've read about), the better it is.
If you contact HP support about a problem with your device, you should always follow up with them, and continue following up with them.

FrinkTL: HP probably pulled your thread because it violated HP's forum policy (excerpted here):

Quote:

A posting that is deemed not acceptable may be edited and/or removed without notice at the discretion of HP. Examples of such posts include:

2. “Rants”, “slams”, or legal threats against HP or another company or competitor, similar to “chat room” behavior.

Since you received nothing more than a form letter, it is highly unlikely you'll get any kind of response to your return email, and as far as I can tell, HP very rarely bans users.

harpgliss · 04-09-08, 07:57 PM

Hi,

Originally Posted by FrinkTL

If it's so much effort and cost to build and certify a ROM, why not CHARGE for them? That would make the stockholders happy. It would make us users and corporate clients happy/happier. There are enough "stay on the most recent version" addicts out there (no offense intended to you if you're one of them - I tend to be the same way about hardware) that it would probably meet with moderate sales, especially for more "major" upgrades. Even I (a true "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" guy) might fork over close to $100 to keep a $500 device current.

Would charging be economical for them?

I have not seen numbers on sales figures to know this.

Also not sure of the number of users willing to payfor an incremental upgrade.

They still have to be able to make money on it, and, if the current rom is really as buggy as users say, what gives one confidence they can do an upgrade that is not buggy?

FrinkTL · 04-09-08, 08:20 PM

I just chatted with the Business Support Center, and their word on what the "3 year lifecycle" (HP iPAQ 210 Enterprise Handheld overview - HP Small & Medium Business products) means that is how long they expect the Hardware to LAST, if treated well. Hmmm...